Affects of the balkanization of mail blacklisting
This is getting really annoying. It seems multiple large networks have stolen copies of the MAPS DUL (I wonder if this is the cause or an effect of MAPS going commercial?) which of course are not being kept in-sync with the real MAPS DUL. First it was Earthlink. Today's winner is usa.net.
<xxxxxx@usa.net> (reason: 550 Mail from 209.208.x.y refused. Please refer to http://mail-abuse.org/dul for an explanation.)
The address block in question above was removed from the DUL almost 2 weeks ago, but usa.net is still blocking mail from it today, and claiming that they're doing so via the MAPS DUL. How many other networks have stolen copies of the DUL and either nobody maintaining their local copies or bogus sendmail reject messages pointing you to the wrong place (or no place) to get the problem fixed? If you're going to run your own locally maintained email blacklist, at least get the rejection messages right and give out a correct URL for procedures on getting off your blacklist. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route System Administrator | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
They aren't stolen copies, They are the last secondary transfer of the dul domain before MAPS closed its servers up. Roy Engehausen jlewis@lewis.org wrote:
This is getting really annoying. It seems multiple large networks have stolen copies of the MAPS DUL (I wonder if this is the cause or an effect of MAPS going commercial?) which of course are not being kept in-sync with the real MAPS DUL. First it was Earthlink. Today's winner is usa.net.
<xxxxxx@usa.net> (reason: 550 Mail from 209.208.x.y refused. Please refer to http://mail-abuse.org/dul for an explanation.)
The address block in question above was removed from the DUL almost 2 weeks ago, but usa.net is still blocking mail from it today, and claiming that they're doing so via the MAPS DUL.
How many other networks have stolen copies of the DUL and either nobody maintaining their local copies or bogus sendmail reject messages pointing you to the wrong place (or no place) to get the problem fixed?
If you're going to run your own locally maintained email blacklist, at least get the rejection messages right and give out a correct URL for procedures on getting off your blacklist.
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route System Administrator | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
IIRC, MAPS hasn't allowed free zone transfers for quite some time. Whether or not it's really "stolen" is for MAPS to think about and a judge to decide (if MAPS decides to go that route). The big problem with this is usa.net is saying "go complain to MAPS", but MAPS can't help. Obviously, they don't want people stealing it, or they wouldn't have removed the CIDR text version of the DUL from their web site. I don't have access to a zone file to check, but I suspect MAPS would have been setting a relatively small expire time on the zones so this sort of thing wouldn't happen without someone at usa.net editing the zone and making themselves a master for it. If they did that, why didn't they update their mail servers? The point is, if everyone creates their own DUL, and those DULs are poorly maintained and have no documented procedures for submissions and deletions, it's going to be a major PITA for network operators as their customers complain "this IP space is no good, it's in DULs all over the net, give me some virgin IP space." On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Roy wrote:
They aren't stolen copies, They are the last secondary transfer of the dul domain before MAPS closed its servers up.
Roy Engehausen
jlewis@lewis.org wrote:
This is getting really annoying. It seems multiple large networks have stolen copies of the MAPS DUL (I wonder if this is the cause or an effect of MAPS going commercial?) which of course are not being kept in-sync with the real MAPS DUL. First it was Earthlink. Today's winner is usa.net.
<xxxxxx@usa.net> (reason: 550 Mail from 209.208.x.y refused. Please refer to http://mail-abuse.org/dul for an explanation.)
The address block in question above was removed from the DUL almost 2 weeks ago, but usa.net is still blocking mail from it today, and claiming that they're doing so via the MAPS DUL.
How many other networks have stolen copies of the DUL and either nobody maintaining their local copies or bogus sendmail reject messages pointing you to the wrong place (or no place) to get the problem fixed?
If you're going to run your own locally maintained email blacklist, at least get the rejection messages right and give out a correct URL for procedures on getting off your blacklist.
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route System Administrator | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route System Administrator | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 12:10:54PM -0400, jlewis@lewis.org wrote:
Subject: Re: Affects of the balkanization of mail blacklisting
Ahhh - the point exactly. As long as ISPs find it financially attractive to allow spammers to operate, and to not even enforce the anti-spamming clauses in their contracts with their customers, there is little incentive for those who don't want to bear the cost of spam delivery to either use central lists or to be careful or precise as to why delivery from a specific site is blocked. For most, the private lists become roach motels - once a domain or IP address checks in, it never checks out. Complain to the domain who got listed in the first place, wink wink, nudge nudge. -=[L]=-
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Lou Katz wrote:
Complain to the domain who got listed in the first place, wink wink, nudge nudge.
Ummm, the DUL is a list of dialup ports. When it was started, the intent was not to punish ISPs listed there, but to give mail admins a list of IPs that represent dialup ports, which generally should not be sending mail directly. It is not a mark of shame to be on the DUL. Some of us actually *volunteered* such information to maps. Which brings me to another point that's been eating at me since maps went commercial... DUL seemed like more of a community effort than RBL or RSS. Many entries were added by people volunteering their own information with the idea that it was for the "common good". I for one, feel shafted that this list to which I contributed, is only available if I choose to pay a sizable amount of money. As for MAPS working out deals for smaller customers, I've not yet received any replies from their sales kritters, which I will interpret as a "NO". Charles
-=[L]=-
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Lou Katz wrote:
Complain to the domain who got listed in the first place, wink wink, nudge nudge.
Ummm, the DUL is a list of dialup ports. When it was started, the intent was not to punish ISPs listed there, but to give mail admins a list of IPs that represent dialup ports, which generally should not be sending mail directly. It is not a mark of shame to be on the DUL. Some of us actually *volunteered* such information to maps.
That's actually the case here. The IP range in question was at one time dial-up ports, and we added it to the DUL. It was later recycled and removed from the DUL, but apparently not before others grabbed their own snapshot copies of the DUL. I suppose we'll have to be more careful and designate IP blocks as dial-ups permenantly from now on. Of course, I don't expect ARIN will buy that as "efficient use of space". I can just see going to ARIN asking for more IPs: We need to turn up more business customers, but all we have left are these old dial-up pool ranges. We can't give these blocks to our business customers because it's too big a PITA for them to find and get out of all the blacklists, so just give us some new IP space. Can you say "rejected"? I think you can :) This is kind of like (though not as bad) when AGIS was hosting Cyberpromo and others. How many ISP's manually blacklisted those IP blocks from their mail servers? Even after AGIS got rid of the spammer customers, those IP ranges were pretty much worthless. I wonder who, if anyone, is using them today?
Which brings me to another point that's been eating at me since maps went commercial... DUL seemed like more of a community effort than RBL or RSS. Many entries were added by people volunteering their own information with the idea that it was for the "common good". I for one, feel shafted that this list to which I contributed, is only available if I choose to pay a sizable amount of money.
I feel the same way. We spent time occasionaly making sure the DUL was in sync with our dial-up blocks, adding and removing IP blocks as necessary. Now, we no longer have access to the DUL. We also no longer have an easy way (CIDR text format) to scan the entire DUL to see which of our blocks some bozo has incorrectly nominated, and MAPS blindly accepted. I still think it's worth maintaining, to reduce the number of complaints we'll get about spammers signing up for throw-away accounts on our network, but it's hard to justify spending time working on that now that we don't directly benefit from being able to use it. In fact, I suppose MAPS is largely to blame for the current situation. If they hadn't had their sudden change in policy, most networks probably wouldn't bother to create their own DULs. I know about several of the RSS alternatives, but has anyone setup a DUL alternative? If not, I'll consider doing it. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route System Administrator | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
Joe Jared has integrated one into http://relays.osirusoft.com - I think he returns 127.0.0.3 for dialup blocks. The web page isn't real clear as to how you add/remove blocks from his list. It looks like he has some automated tools for spam submission but I don't see much detail on how to manage the rest of the database other than mail directly to Joe. Mark Radabaugh Amplex (419) 833-3635
I might be willing to, if I could be assured that a decent number of large providers would participate. On Sat, 11 Aug 2001 jlewis@lewis.org wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Lou Katz wrote:
Complain to the domain who got listed in the first place, wink wink, nudge nudge.
Ummm, the DUL is a list of dialup ports. When it was started, the intent was not to punish ISPs listed there, but to give mail admins a list of IPs that represent dialup ports, which generally should not be sending mail directly. It is not a mark of shame to be on the DUL. Some of us actually *volunteered* such information to maps.
That's actually the case here. The IP range in question was at one time dial-up ports, and we added it to the DUL. It was later recycled and removed from the DUL, but apparently not before others grabbed their own snapshot copies of the DUL. I suppose we'll have to be more careful and designate IP blocks as dial-ups permenantly from now on. Of course, I don't expect ARIN will buy that as "efficient use of space". I can just see going to ARIN asking for more IPs:
We need to turn up more business customers, but all we have left are these old dial-up pool ranges. We can't give these blocks to our business customers because it's too big a PITA for them to find and get out of all the blacklists, so just give us some new IP space.
Can you say "rejected"? I think you can :)
This is kind of like (though not as bad) when AGIS was hosting Cyberpromo and others. How many ISP's manually blacklisted those IP blocks from their mail servers? Even after AGIS got rid of the spammer customers, those IP ranges were pretty much worthless. I wonder who, if anyone, is using them today?
Which brings me to another point that's been eating at me since maps went commercial... DUL seemed like more of a community effort than RBL or RSS. Many entries were added by people volunteering their own information with the idea that it was for the "common good". I for one, feel shafted that this list to which I contributed, is only available if I choose to pay a sizable amount of money.
I feel the same way. We spent time occasionaly making sure the DUL was in sync with our dial-up blocks, adding and removing IP blocks as necessary. Now, we no longer have access to the DUL. We also no longer have an easy way (CIDR text format) to scan the entire DUL to see which of our blocks some bozo has incorrectly nominated, and MAPS blindly accepted.
I still think it's worth maintaining, to reduce the number of complaints we'll get about spammers signing up for throw-away accounts on our network, but it's hard to justify spending time working on that now that we don't directly benefit from being able to use it. In fact, I suppose MAPS is largely to blame for the current situation. If they hadn't had their sudden change in policy, most networks probably wouldn't bother to create their own DULs.
I know about several of the RSS alternatives, but has anyone setup a DUL alternative? If not, I'll consider doing it.
-- JustThe.net LLC - Steve "Web Dude" Sobol, CTO - sjsobol@JustThe.net Donate a portion of your monthly ISP bill to your favorite charity or non-profit organization! E-mail me for details.
It would have been nice if we could all agreed on a DUL database that would be distributed free to anyone to use. jlewis@lewis.org wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Lou Katz wrote:
Complain to the domain who got listed in the first place, wink wink, nudge nudge.
Ummm, the DUL is a list of dialup ports. When it was started, the intent was not to punish ISPs listed there, but to give mail admins a list of IPs that represent dialup ports, which generally should not be sending mail directly. It is not a mark of shame to be on the DUL. Some of us actually *volunteered* such information to maps.
That's actually the case here. The IP range in question was at one time dial-up ports, and we added it to the DUL. It was later recycled and removed from the DUL, but apparently not before others grabbed their own snapshot copies of the DUL. I suppose we'll have to be more careful and designate IP blocks as dial-ups permenantly from now on. Of course, I don't expect ARIN will buy that as "efficient use of space". I can just see going to ARIN asking for more IPs:
We need to turn up more business customers, but all we have left are these old dial-up pool ranges. We can't give these blocks to our business customers because it's too big a PITA for them to find and get out of all the blacklists, so just give us some new IP space.
Can you say "rejected"? I think you can :)
This is kind of like (though not as bad) when AGIS was hosting Cyberpromo and others. How many ISP's manually blacklisted those IP blocks from their mail servers? Even after AGIS got rid of the spammer customers, those IP ranges were pretty much worthless. I wonder who, if anyone, is using them today?
Which brings me to another point that's been eating at me since maps went commercial... DUL seemed like more of a community effort than RBL or RSS. Many entries were added by people volunteering their own information with the idea that it was for the "common good". I for one, feel shafted that this list to which I contributed, is only available if I choose to pay a sizable amount of money.
I feel the same way. We spent time occasionaly making sure the DUL was in sync with our dial-up blocks, adding and removing IP blocks as necessary. Now, we no longer have access to the DUL. We also no longer have an easy way (CIDR text format) to scan the entire DUL to see which of our blocks some bozo has incorrectly nominated, and MAPS blindly accepted.
I still think it's worth maintaining, to reduce the number of complaints we'll get about spammers signing up for throw-away accounts on our network, but it's hard to justify spending time working on that now that we don't directly benefit from being able to use it. In fact, I suppose MAPS is largely to blame for the current situation. If they hadn't had their sudden change in policy, most networks probably wouldn't bother to create their own DULs.
I know about several of the RSS alternatives, but has anyone setup a DUL alternative? If not, I'll consider doing it.
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route System Administrator | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Roy wrote:
It would have been nice if we could all agreed on a DUL database that would be distributed free to anyone to use.
I know about several of the RSS alternatives, but has anyone setup a DUL alternative? If not, I'll consider doing it.
That would be the only point in doing it if I were to do it. Zone transfer access would be encouraged, if not required. Users would be strongly encouraged to put a NOC or abuse contact on a mailing list that would be used for announcements only. There would have to be a web site giving clear instructions on how to add/remove IP blocks. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route System Administrator | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
--On Saturday, August 11, 2001 11:24 AM -0700 Roy <garlic@garlic.com> wrote:
It would have been nice if we could all agreed on a DUL database that would be distributed free to anyone to use.
Naturally, I have a different perspective. ;) MAPS has developed, maintained and published these lists for a number of years, on our nickel. The "nickel" to date is to the tune of several million dollars in operational and legal expenses. That's cash folks, not donated equipment, not donated bandwidth, not volunteer efforts. Cold, hard, CASH. It didn't come from corporate donations, it didn't come from subscriptions. 99% of it came out of Dave's and Paul's pockets. MAPS as a corporation must have revenue to operate. We tried to produce that revenue with a paid service called the RBL+. We tried to produce that revenue with our outsourced abuse services. The people that could most afford to use those services chose to continue to use the free queries (at the rate of 10s of millions of queries a day for some ISPs) rather than paying their own way. That had to stop. The only way to stop it was to restrict access all access to the zones. You folks are certainly free to start your own lists, or, you could encourage your employers to financially support the organization that has been financially carrying them for all this time. The fees are based on cost, not profit. MAPS remains a not-for-profit corporation. For most mid-sized networks, the cost to them is $0.05 per user per year . For the small outfits, its less than my annual Starbuck's expenses ;) -- Margie Arbon MAPS, LLC
On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 12:28:39PM -0700, Margie wrote:
--On Saturday, August 11, 2001 11:24 AM -0700 Roy <garlic@garlic.com> wrote:
It would have been nice if we could all agreed on a DUL database that would be distributed free to anyone to use.
Naturally, I have a different perspective. ;)
MAPS has developed, maintained and published these lists for a number of years, on our nickel. The "nickel" to date is to the tune of several million dollars in operational and legal expenses. That's cash folks, not donated equipment, not donated bandwidth, not volunteer efforts. Cold, hard, CASH. It didn't come from corporate donations, it didn't come from subscriptions. 99% of it came out of Dave's and Paul's pockets.
Indeed they have. And some of us are quite thankful for the gift. But that is, effectively, what it was - like all of the community efforts that give away code, or lists of abusers, or anything else.
MAPS as a corporation must have revenue to operate. We tried to produce that revenue with a paid service called the RBL+. We tried to produce that revenue with our outsourced abuse services. The people that could most afford to use those services chose to continue to use the free queries (at the rate of 10s of millions of queries a day for some ISPs) rather than paying their own way. That had to stop. The only way to stop it was to restrict access all access to the zones.
This is true; operating costs are > 0, and must be offset by either donations (invidual or corporate), or fees. MAPS has now changed which of these they are using to fund themselves, and this has consequences, just as it does for every other non-profit (animal shelters, PBS based TV stations, etc).
You folks are certainly free to start your own lists, or, you could encourage your employers to financially support the organization that has been financially carrying them for all this time.
Indeed. Of course, some of us either don't control the bean counters, or are very small networks whose costs due to spam are easily exceeded, even by the new "low cost" version of MAPS. And some are just militantly anti-commercial about things, and will now treat MAPS like any other commercial entity, rather than community service - IE, if they want an up-to-date list of dialup IPs, they can darn well pay for it, since they're charging for use of the information. Formerly, this would have fallen into the category of "donation".
The fees are based on cost, not profit. MAPS remains a not-for-profit corporation. For most mid-sized networks, the cost to them is $0.05 per user per year . For the small outfits, its less than my annual Starbuck's expenses ;)
And some companies trying to do dialup are doing it on a very slim margin for those dialup customers. All in all, MAPS can do whatever they like, and always could - but what they have chosen to do will almost certainly now put them in a model where they will be in competition against those services which choose to run on donations rather than fees, and provide a similar service. I would say "may the better business model win", but I'm not sure that's really what's in the best interest of the 'Net at large. It certainly hasn't been, in a lot of cases. Generally because "business" puts money first and foremost, while the 'Net was largely built on a trust basis that collapses as soon as it's abused. Just the way things panned out. -- *************************************************************************** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com lucifer@lightbearer.com http://www.lightbearer.com/~lucifer
In article <1100507318.997532919@[192.168.0.2]>, Margie <margie@mail-abuse.org> wrote:
MAPS as a corporation must have revenue to operate.
Has MAPS ever talked to organisations like RIPE and ARIN? Most providers are a paying member of those anyway. MAPS might or could be an organisation just as important for the continuity of the internet as those ones. If you could persuade them to work together and let them offer MAPS to their members and pay the bill .. Mike. -- "dselect has a user interface which scares small children" -- Theodore Tso, on debian-devel
On 08/13/01, Miquel van Smoorenburg <miquels@cistron-office.nl> wrote:
In article <1100507318.997532919@[192.168.0.2]>, Margie <margie@mail-abuse.org> wrote:
MAPS as a corporation must have revenue to operate.
Has MAPS ever talked to organisations like RIPE and ARIN? Most providers are a paying member of those anyway. MAPS might or could be an organisation just as important for the continuity of the internet as those ones. If you could persuade them to work together and let them offer MAPS to their members and pay the bill ..
Remember how much shit ARIN got here when it was first announced that they'd be charging for IP addresses? That thread was much worse than the recent MAPS hubbub -- probably because MAPS has big, scary, easy-to-understand money holes like "legal fees," while all ARIN's got is "operating expenses." -- J.D. Falk a plenitude should not be wasted <jdfalk@cybernothing.org>
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, J.D. Falk wrote:
Remember how much shit ARIN got here when it was first announced that they'd be charging for IP addresses? That thread was much worse than the recent MAPS hubbub -- probably because MAPS has big, scary, easy-to-understand money holes like "legal fees," while all ARIN's got is "operating expenses."
Apparently, the legal fees have escalated as a number of injured parties have filed suit against MAPS and the courts found some merit in their complaints. Making a living at disrupting other providers' communications is bound to lead to that kind of reaction. Unfortunately, only well heeled companies can afford to protect their rights in federal court. Let's face it JD, this is a high stakes game, and the winner stands to collect the entire jackpot. They'll either get the court blessed right to be your Big Brother over all your communications and get the monopoly to censor, or they'll risk going under. This was clearly outlined in the MAPS battle plan that desires a legal confrontation to make case law. In other words, they purposely sought out to incur those "big, scary money holes like legal fees". They got their wish. Should just one of the 3 plaintiffs win... --Mitch NetSide
Let's face it JD, this is a high stakes game, and the winner stands to collect the entire jackpot. They'll either get the court blessed right to be your Big Brother over all your communications and get the monopoly to censor, or they'll risk going under. This was clearly outlined in the MAPS battle plan that desires a legal confrontation to make case law. In other words, they purposely sought out to incur those "big, scary money holes like legal fees". They got their wish.
you could be right. i guess it's time i sent them another donation. randy
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Randy Bush wrote:
you could be right. i guess it's time i sent them another donation.
randy
Save it: the people MAPS has harmed neet it more. -- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Randy Bush wrote:
you could be right. i guess it's time i sent them another donation. Save it: the people MAPS has harmed neet it more.
support low-life, slimeball, spammers? ROFL!
No, I'm not talking about the spammers who were caught in maps, I'm referring to the INNOCENTS who were caught in MAPS. If the LEO community acted like MAPS does, there would have been armed revolution in the streets *years ago*. MAPS never gave a shit about facts, they cared only about their agenda - no matter who got hurt in the way. Fuckem. Vixie is a netnazi who would do us all a favor if he just blew what little brains he has left out of his left ear. -- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 11:09:40PM -0500, measl@mfn.org wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Randy Bush wrote:
you could be right. i guess it's time i sent them another donation. Save it: the people MAPS has harmed neet it more.
support low-life, slimeball, spammers? ROFL!
No, I'm not talking about the spammers who were caught in maps, I'm referring to the INNOCENTS who were caught in MAPS. If the LEO community acted like MAPS does, there would have been armed revolution in the streets *years ago*.
MAPS never gave a shit about facts, they cared only about their agenda - no matter who got hurt in the way.
Fuckem. Vixie is a netnazi who would do us all a favor if he just blew what little brains he has left out of his left ear.
I think you are confused and talking about ORBS. the MAPS people have not acted with any agenda that I've ever seen. I'm not saying that I agree with all the things that MAPS or Vixie has done during their lifetimes but I think they provide a valuable service. With the orbs, maps changes recently i've seen the volume of spam increase by several orders of magnitude. I wish there was a clean way to filter it out. - Jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Jared Mauch wrote:
No, I'm not talking about the spammers who were caught in maps, I'm referring to the INNOCENTS who were caught in MAPS. If the LEO community acted like MAPS does, there would have been armed revolution in the streets *years ago*.
MAPS never gave a shit about facts, they cared only about their agenda - no matter who got hurt in the way.
Fuckem. Vixie is a netnazi who would do us all a favor if he just blew what little brains he has left out of his left ear.
I think you are confused and talking about ORBS. the MAPS people have not acted with any agenda that I've ever seen.
I assure you I am not confused. ORBS was intolerably worse, but MAPS is still not something I am looking forward to seeing survive.
I'm not saying that I agree with all the things that MAPS or Vixie has done during their lifetimes but I think they provide a valuable service.
Then of course, you are free to subscribe.
With the orbs, maps changes recently i've seen the volume of spam increase by several orders of magnitude.
Agreed.
I wish there was a clean way to filter it out.
There are plenty, but most of us are too goddamn lazy to do it ourselves, and ask for an ORBS or MAPS like service to do it for us. We have NEVER had a spam problem (we've been here since 1994) going out - not a single incident (not that we probably won't haqve one *someday*, but still, it's a hell of a good track record). The SPAM problem goes up and down to be sure, but you know what? PROCMAIL is your friend. All you need to look for are the basics (ADV, Make Money, etc) and you can instatly filter 90 percent of this trash into the bitbucket. At work (not mfn.org), I get several orders of magnitude more mail (usually obnoxious at that) from the "gentle anti-spammers" than the poor "victims" get themselves! Lets get my position straight: I think spam is annoying as heel, and should not be done. I don't think that SPAM is going to cause any major social upheavals. I also disagree that all people want to be spared from SPAM, and with thaqt in mind, I believe everyone should defend themselves to the best of their interest, and leave the next guy alone: he or she probably has *way* more important things to worry about.
- Jared -- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
Why on earth does this maudlin disestablishmentarian nonsense inevitably come up around MAPS? People have a RIGHT to do with THEIR NETWORKS what THEY WANT TO. Anyone who says that I have to spend money on bandwidth and equipment for spam just because they can't police an AUP on THEIR NETWORK doesn't deserve to be in business. On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Jared Mauch wrote:
Fuckem. Vixie is a netnazi who would do us all a favor if he just blew what little brains he has left out of his left ear.
Paul Vixie has contributed far more to the Internet as a whole and the community of his peers than you ever will, little man. Your cursory dismissal underscores your dilettantism.
The SPAM problem goes up and down to be sure, but you know what? PROCMAIL is your friend. All you need to look for are the basics (ADV, Make Money, etc) and you can instatly filter 90 percent of this trash into the bitbucket.
That is such a cop out. That is like saying, "Well you know, pollution is bad but if you wear this smog filter you only ingest 10 percent of the noxious waste." If network administrators at ALL service providers did their job properly, you wouldn't have to filter at all. This is just the same as having proper RFC 1918 egress filters; it is only being a responsible member of the provider community and preventing grief for the next guy. There is a major difference between freedom and license that you don't seem to understand. Regards, Geoff Zinderdine CCNP MCP CCA SOB
There are plenty, but most of us are too goddamn lazy to do it ourselves, and ask for an ORBS or MAPS like service to do it for us. We have ? NEVER had a spam problem (we've been here since 1994) going out - not > a single incident (not that we probably won't haqve one *someday*, but ? still, it's a hell of a good track record).
There aren't plenty of ways. If it were such an easy task, we would not be having this conversation.
The SPAM problem goes up and down to be sure, but you know what? PROCMAIL is your friend. All you need to look for are the basics (ADV, Make Money, etc) and you can instatly filter 90 percent of this trash into the bitbucket.
So lets see, I write an email to a client and use the words "make money" either in the header or in the body of the message... did someone all of a sudden give you the right to filter my mail based on content? Glad I don't have you doing my mail.
Lets get my position straight: I think spam is annoying as heel, and should not be done. I don't think that SPAM is going to cause any major social upheavals. I also disagree that all people want to be spared from SPAM, and with thaqt in mind, I believe everyone should defend themselves to the best of their interest, and leave the next guy alone: he or she probably has *way* more important things to worry about.
SPAM is a major problem. It is causing large ISPs and SP a great deal of money and resources. Why should I have to spend my hard earned profits purchasing filtering solutions like Brightmail. If there is an industry created due to problems dealing with SPAM, we have a big issue on our hands. Lets Make a List of Things we need to get done 1) World Peace 2) End to Hunger 3) Elimination of SPAM
alright, this is the last thing I'm going to say on this particular point... (heh, how many times have we heard *that* from me...) On Mon, 13 Aug 2001 measl@mfn.org wrote:
There are plenty, but most of us are too goddamn lazy to do it ourselves, and ask for an ORBS or MAPS like service to do it for us. We have NEVER had a spam problem (we've been here since 1994) going out - not a single incident (not that we probably won't haqve one *someday*, but still, it's a hell of a good track record).
OK, fine. For the purposes of this argument I'll take that statement at face value, although I'd be curious where you work. If you're an IT type at a big corporation whose primary line of business isn't Internet access, then your statement means nothing as outgoing spam is much easier to control when you're not an ISP/IAP/NSP/*SP.
The SPAM problem goes up and down to be sure, but you know what? PROCMAIL is your friend. All you need to look for are the basics (ADV, Make Money, etc) and you can instatly filter 90 percent of this trash into the bitbucket.
This sounds like "Just Hit Delete". Most of us who dislike spam would prefer to remove the problems, not just the symptoms.
At work (not mfn.org), I get several orders of magnitude more mail (usually obnoxious at that) from the "gentle anti-spammers" than the poor "victims" get themselves!
And why is it that you're getting all this mail? Most anti-spammers I know of just don't go looking for targets to shoot at, they complain to the sources of spam that they have *actually received.*
should not be done. I don't think that SPAM is going to cause any major social upheavals. I also disagree that all people want to be spared from SPAM, and with thaqt in mind, I believe everyone should defend themselves to the best of their interest, and leave the next guy alone: he or she probably has *way* more important things to worry about.
I think you have an agenda. I think further that you are not being completely honest with us about why you have a bone to pick with MAPS. The people who read this mailing list aren't naive. You won't find John Q. AOL-Member reading your posts. I have plenty of experience working on the net, and I actually consider myself one of the least experienced people who regularly posts here... I look at reading many of the NANOG threads as a learning experience, and contribute what little I have to contribute. Anyhow, you'll find that most of the people here are pretty good at critical thinking, which is a necessity in the line of business in which we work. And I am sure that others will be happy to pick apart your arguments. For my own edification... all I am asking is that you come clean and tell us the ENTIRE story. -- JustThe.net LLC - Steve "Web Dude" Sobol, CTO - sjsobol@JustThe.net Donate a portion of your monthly ISP bill to your favorite charity or non-profit organization! E-mail me for details.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of measl@mfn.org Sent: August 14, 2001 12:10 AM To: Randy Bush Cc: Mitch Halmu; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Affects of the balkanization of mail blacklisting
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Randy Bush wrote:
you could be right. i guess it's time i sent them another donation. Save it: the people MAPS has harmed neet it more.
support low-life, slimeball, spammers? ROFL!
No, I'm not talking about the spammers who were caught in maps, I'm referring to the INNOCENTS who were caught in MAPS. If the LEO community acted like MAPS does, there would have been armed revolution in the streets *years ago*.
The INNOCENTS caught in MAPS were usually affiliated with someone guilty in some way in another; eg would Mitch's customers be considered innocent victims of MAPS, even though their victimness is directly due to their decision to do business with someone who is guilty?
MAPS never gave a shit about facts, they cared only about their agenda - no matter who got hurt in the way.
Funny, I could say the same about you: "You never gave a s**t about facts, you cared only about your agenda - no matter who got spammed in the way".
Fuckem. Vixie is a netnazi who would do us all a favor if he just blew what little brains he has left out of his left ear.
Vixie's done a lot of things other than MAPS that have done a lot of good; BIND, anyone? I'm sure there are a bunch of others but exposure to such stupidity as your post has caused my mind to go blank. BTW, if I replaced "Vixie" with "You and Mitch" in that sentence, I think it might reflect the opinion of "us all" a bit better, because lots of us don't seem to mind his existence. Vivien -- Vivien M. vivienm@dyndns.org Assistant System Administrator Dynamic DNS Network Services http://www.dyndns.org/
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Vivien M. wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Randy Bush wrote:
you could be right. i guess it's time i sent them another donation. Save it: the people MAPS has harmed neet it more.
support low-life, slimeball, spammers? ROFL!
No, I'm not talking about the spammers who were caught in maps, I'm referring to the INNOCENTS who were caught in MAPS. If the LEO community acted like MAPS does, there would have been armed revolution in the streets *years ago*.
The INNOCENTS caught in MAPS were usually affiliated with someone guilty in some way in another; eg would Mitch's customers be considered innocent victims of MAPS, even though their victimness is directly due to their decision to do business with someone who is guilty?
Guilty of what, Vivien? You are accusing me of being a spammer? NetSide's customers were fully informed of our stance published on a web site dedicated to the problem, most agreed, and those that chose to stay and endure the year-long MAPS blockade obviously like their communications uncensored, and truly appreciate being able to transparently use their accounts from elsewhere (i.e., from the office).
MAPS never gave a shit about facts, they cared only about their agenda - no matter who got hurt in the way.
Funny, I could say the same about you: "You never gave a s**t about facts, you cared only about your agenda - no matter who got spammed in the way".
The "collateral damage" they inflicted is simply unacceptable. The MAPS "agenda" came fully into the limelight with the fees they now ask for the "service". I dare to be as bold as to imply that their agenda is akin to extracting "protection" money from ISPs. Do you really expect them to blackhole some of their paying "customers"?
Fuckem. Vixie is a netnazi who would do us all a favor if he just blew what little brains he has left out of his left ear.
Vixie's done a lot of things other than MAPS that have done a lot of good; BIND, anyone? I'm sure there are a bunch of others but exposure to such stupidity as your post has caused my mind to go blank.
So Der Fuehrer constructed the German autobahn, Il Duce made the Italian trains roll on time, etc. Are they good people? While I don't even question Vixie's great contributions such as BIND, I am fighting his little MAPS charity based strictly on the belief that no private party has the right to appoint themselves as communications censors. That role, if it ever comes to it, can only be filled by laws and a government mandate.
BTW, if I replaced "Vixie" with "You and Mitch" in that sentence, I think it might reflect the opinion of "us all" a bit better, because lots of us don't seem to mind his existence.
Vivien
What can I say? We all have our idols and foes. Being objective and impartial about their actions, and having the courage to point at your friend's errors, or dare to disagree with something viewed as "politically correct" in some circles is a different story. It certainly wont't win you any popularity contests... --Mitch NetSide
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Mitch Halmu wrote:
So Der Fuehrer constructed the German autobahn, Il Duce made the Italian trains roll on time, etc. Are they good people? While I don't even question Vixie's great contributions such as BIND, I am fighting his little MAPS charity based strictly on the belief that no private party has the right to appoint themselves as communications censors. That role, if it ever comes to it, can only be filled by laws and a government mandate.
But you have yet to ever tell anyone how, exactly, MAPS does any censoring. They provide(d?) a list of IP addresses. That is _all_ they have ever done. I cannot go up to Vixie or MAPS and say "filter my mail for me", nor have I ever (that I'm aware of) been able to do so. MAPS does NOT censor anything. Period. They provide a set of information, which ISPs make a (presumably informed) decision to do filtering (or censorship, if you want to call it that) based on. That is a business decision for those ISPs to make, a right which I'm pretty sure I recall you defending at some point in one of the monthly MAPS/ORBS/whoever is evil flamewars. You dance around the real facts in this matter _every single time_ this is brought up. Please explain to me, exactly how MAPS censors anything. I'll look forward to your reply. And don't tell me MAPS filtering is enabled by default in Sendmail, or point me to your propaganda page - the first one isn't true, and I've read the second before - it doesn't answer my question. And if you can't come up with an explanation, can we please end this monthly flamewar early and keep me from having to add some more rules to my .procmailrc? Tim -- Tim Wilde twilde@dyndns.org Systems Administrator Dynamic DNS Network Services http://www.dyndns.org/
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Tim Wilde wrote:
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Mitch Halmu wrote:
So Der Fuehrer constructed the German autobahn, Il Duce made the Italian trains roll on time, etc. Are they good people? While I don't even question Vixie's great contributions such as BIND, I am fighting his little MAPS charity based strictly on the belief that no private party has the right to appoint themselves as communications censors. That role, if it ever comes to it, can only be filled by laws and a government mandate.
But you have yet to ever tell anyone how, exactly, MAPS does any censoring. They provide(d?) a list of IP addresses. That is _all_ they have ever done. I cannot go up to Vixie or MAPS and say "filter my mail for me", nor have I ever (that I'm aware of) been able to do so. MAPS does NOT censor anything. Period. They provide a set of information, which ISPs make a (presumably informed) decision to do filtering (or censorship, if you want to call it that) based on. That is a business decision for those ISPs to make, a right which I'm pretty sure I recall you defending at some point in one of the monthly MAPS/ORBS/whoever is evil flamewars.
You dance around the real facts in this matter _every single time_ this is brought up. Please explain to me, exactly how MAPS censors anything. I'll look forward to your reply. And don't tell me MAPS filtering is enabled by default in Sendmail, or point me to your propaganda page - the first one isn't true, and I've read the second before - it doesn't answer my question.
And if you can't come up with an explanation, can we please end this monthly flamewar early and keep me from having to add some more rules to my .procmailrc?
Tim
Okay Tim, I would like to start by mentioning an interesting Jul 16, 2001 article titled "European Parliament doesn't want to ban spam": http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/internet/07/16/parliament.spam.idg/index.html It goes as far as to state: "The EU Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs Committee voted on a directive stating that it should be legal for companies to send spam by e-mail or SMS (short message service) mobile text messages, just as long as the solicitation comes with an address that allows recipients to request that they be removed from the mailing list". This stance is mirrored by some bills introduced in the US Congress, although to date we don't have a federal law in force regulating spam. Some states have adopted their own measures, but nothing exists yet at the national level. Hence, strictly from a juridic viewpoint, spam is legal in the US and Europe. While providers may complain that a million spam messages brought down their server, and if they find the culprit they have a cause of action for denial of services, they can't prosecute somebody for sending a single UCE. Yet my service was blacklisted by Dave Rand for a single count of UCE relayed to his domain bungi.com by a Corecomm user. They now claim that in order to get off the MAPS blacklist, the server has to be open to their probing. As far as I'm concerned, MAPS causes NetSide's communications to be censored for the deed of another provider's user. What's next? This is what can happen when MAPS/Abovenet are allowed to exercise censorship powers without accountability: http://www.peacefire.org/stealth/group-statement.5-17-2001.html http://www.nwfusion.com/archive/1999b/0308kobielus.html http://slashdot.org/yro/00/12/13/1853237.shtml http://slashdot.org/yro/01/05/21/1944247.shtml http://www.dotcomeon.com/abovenet_blackhole.html As you can read for yourself, the block wasn't only for SMTP servers, but it blanked out communications from entire sites, including their web servers. If that kind of communications disruption is not censorship, then what do you call it? --Mitch NetSide
More so, it is trivial to "overrrule" a MAPS listing in your mail server or router if you don't agree with it. So there's no "all or nothing" rule either. This applies to any DNS-based, and probably other types, of BLs. -C
But you have yet to ever tell anyone how, exactly, MAPS does any censoring. They provide(d?) a list of IP addresses. That is _all_ they have ever done. I cannot go up to Vixie or MAPS and say "filter my mail for me", nor have I ever (that I'm aware of) been able to do so. MAPS does NOT censor anything. Period. They provide a set of information, which ISPs make a (presumably informed) decision to do filtering (or censorship, if you want to call it that) based on. That is a business decision for those ISPs to make, a right which I'm pretty sure I recall you defending at some point in one of the monthly MAPS/ORBS/whoever is evil flamewars.
You dance around the real facts in this matter _every single time_ this is brought up. Please explain to me, exactly how MAPS censors anything. I'll look forward to your reply. And don't tell me MAPS filtering is enabled by default in Sendmail, or point me to your propaganda page - the first one isn't true, and I've read the second before - it doesn't answer my question.
And if you can't come up with an explanation, can we please end this monthly flamewar early and keep me from having to add some more rules to my .procmailrc?
Tim
-- Tim Wilde twilde@dyndns.org Systems Administrator Dynamic DNS Network Services http://www.dyndns.org/
-- --------------------------- Christopher A. Woodfield rekoil@semihuman.com PGP Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xB887618B
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Mitch Halmu Sent: August 14, 2001 1:24 AM To: Vivien M. Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: RE: Affects of the balkanization of mail blacklisting
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Vivien M. wrote:
The INNOCENTS caught in MAPS were usually affiliated with someone guilty in some way in another; eg would Mitch's customers be considered innocent victims of MAPS, even though their victimness is directly due to their decision to do business with someone who is guilty?
Guilty of what, Vivien? You are accusing me of being a spammer? NetSide's customers were fully informed of our stance published on a web site dedicated to the problem, most agreed, and those that chose to stay and endure the year-long MAPS blockade obviously like their communications uncensored, and truly appreciate being able to transparently use their accounts from elsewhere (i.e., from the office).
MAPS accused you of operating an open relay. You posted to NANOG saying you proudly operate an open relay. That, ladies and gentlemen, is pretty much the textbook definition of an open and shut case. (In my book, that makes you guilty of operating an open relay.) Tell me, if you hate MAPS so much, why haven't you sued them for slander/libel? Is it perhaps because your lawyers told you that MAPS' accusations are TRUE and you'd get yourself laughed out of court?
Funny, I could say the same about you: "You never gave a s**t about facts, you cared only about your agenda - no matter who got spammed in the way".
The "collateral damage" they inflicted is simply unacceptable. The MAPS
They inflicted no damage. Example: your local $ILEC has some Yellow Pages, where you are listed as an ISP. Some bad thiefs want to steal a T1 router or a Sparc 5, and figure an ISP would be a good place to get this equipment. They see your listing, break into your facility, and steal your hardware. Do you sue $ILEC for having set you up for being robbed? Now, MAPS publishes a listing of people who operate an open relay. You admit running an open relay. Someone else uses that listing to refuse mail from you. Why is MAPS in that second example more evil than $ILEC in the first one? Both provided a listing. You suffered damage in both cases because a THIRD PARTY used this listing to cause damage to you. How is the provider of the second listing more to blame?
"agenda" came fully into the limelight with the fees they now ask for the "service". I dare to be as bold as to imply that their agenda is akin
I don't blame them for charging; being in the business of operating a mostly-free service, I have found that people are very hesitant to open their wallet unless they're forced to... when, quite often, a decent amount of wallets are likely to snap open, while the others of the remaining wallets scream "bait and switch". Coincidence? Perhaps it's human nature. (Note: before I get flamed, we haven't pulled that kind of thing on our users - we're too much a bunch of nice naive guys)
Vixie's done a lot of things other than MAPS that have done a lot of good; BIND, anyone? I'm sure there are a bunch of others but exposure to such stupidity as your post has caused my mind to go blank.
So Der Fuehrer constructed the German autobahn, Il Duce made the Italian trains roll on time, etc. Are they good people? While I don't
I'll leave that to the historians to judge. Last time I checked, this wasn't NAHRG - North American History Research Group.
even question Vixie's great contributions such as BIND, I am fighting his little MAPS charity based strictly on the belief that no private party has the right to appoint themselves as communications censors. That role, if it ever comes to it, can only be filled by laws and a government mandate.
Censors? How has MAPS interfered in ANY way with your mail? Let's say I use MAPS (I don't, FYI... we don't have a need for it). You send mail to me. Based on MY decision to have my server trust MAPS' judgment, my server tells your mail to go screw itself. What did MAPS do other than ADVISE me to reject your mail? If I didn't TRUST MAPS' judgment, then I wouldn't use it. That, my friend, is the difference between MAPS and your government censors you seem to WANT. If you have government censors saying "Good ol' Mitch is bad", then it will be the LAW forcing everybody to block you, and you are totally gone. If you have MAPS blacklisting you, then it is ONLY the people who have chosen to TRUST (and pay, nowadays) MAPS that are rejecting your mail. If I were you, I'd prefer the second alternative... at least for your customers' sake. Vivien -- Vivien M. vivienm@dyndns.org Assistant System Administrator Dynamic DNS Network Services http://www.dyndns.org/
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Vivien M. wrote:
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Vivien M. wrote:
The INNOCENTS caught in MAPS were usually affiliated with someone guilty in some way in another; eg would Mitch's customers be considered innocent victims of MAPS, even though their victimness is directly due to their decision to do business with someone who is guilty?
Guilty of what, Vivien? You are accusing me of being a spammer? NetSide's customers were fully informed of our stance published on a web site dedicated to the problem, most agreed, and those that chose to stay and endure the year-long MAPS blockade obviously like their communications uncensored, and truly appreciate being able to transparently use their accounts from elsewhere (i.e., from the office).
MAPS accused you of operating an open relay.
You posted to NANOG saying you proudly operate an open relay.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is pretty much the textbook definition of an open and shut case. (In my book, that makes you guilty of operating an open relay.)
Since when is operating an open relay against the law? Please quote the federal law NetSide has broken in having its mail servers configured as they always were since we started in 1995. Now let me ask you, if it's legal to operate an open relay, then why should we willingly submit to Vixie's law?
Tell me, if you hate MAPS so much, why haven't you sued them for slander/libel? Is it perhaps because your lawyers told you that MAPS' accusations are TRUE and you'd get yourself laughed out of court?
Several law firms we have consulted gave a figure around half a million dollars for a trial to proceed in federal court. That is not only to file, but to actually go to trial in court for a year or so. Plain and simple, we don't have that kind of money. It would make case law, as MAPS desires, but such endeavor requires proper funding.
Funny, I could say the same about you: "You never gave a s**t about facts, you cared only about your agenda - no matter who got spammed in the way".
The "collateral damage" they inflicted is simply unacceptable. The MAPS
They inflicted no damage.
Example: your local $ILEC has some Yellow Pages, where you are listed as an ISP. Some bad thiefs want to steal a T1 router or a Sparc 5, and figure an ISP would be a good place to get this equipment. They see your listing, break into your facility, and steal your hardware.
Do you sue $ILEC for having set you up for being robbed?
Vivien, I'm sure you heard of the right of any phone customer to request and obtain and unlisted number. You may even withhold a physical address listing and just have them publish the number without an address. They are very accommodating, you know?
Now, MAPS publishes a listing of people who operate an open relay. You admit running an open relay. Someone else uses that listing to refuse mail from you.
Why is MAPS in that second example more evil than $ILEC in the first one?
The ILEC publishes the phone listing for the purpose of enhancing a subscriber's business. It is for the convenience of their customers. People even pay hefty fees for flashy display ads in the yellow pages. Conversely, MAPS publishes their list because they don't agree with someone's practices, and with the ultimate purpose of destroying that person's business if they don't conform to whatever they demand. It publishes the list against the will of the listed parties, and most businesses they list haven't broken any laws.
Both provided a listing. You suffered damage in both cases because a THIRD PARTY used this listing to cause damage to you. How is the provider of the second listing more to blame?
Now let me give you an example: some anti-abortion activists publish a list of doctors to be targeted. Funny thing, there is a law against that.
"agenda" came fully into the limelight with the fees they now ask for the "service". I dare to be as bold as to imply that their agenda is akin
I don't blame them for charging; being in the business of operating a mostly-free service, I have found that people are very hesitant to open their wallet unless they're forced to... when, quite often, a decent amount of wallets are likely to snap open, while the others of the remaining wallets scream "bait and switch". Coincidence? Perhaps it's human nature. (Note: before I get flamed, we haven't pulled that kind of thing on our users - we're too much a bunch of nice naive guys)
I do have a problem with how they're making a living. Most private agencies that provide such services are regulated (i.e., credit reporting, insurance, professional associations like realtors). Since it affects the free flow of communications between millions of persons, maybe the time has come for Uncle Sam to take a look at MAPS' line of business and define some rules.
Vixie's done a lot of things other than MAPS that have done a lot of good; BIND, anyone? I'm sure there are a bunch of others but exposure to such stupidity as your post has caused my mind to go blank.
So Der Fuehrer constructed the German autobahn, Il Duce made the Italian trains roll on time, etc. Are they good people? While I don't
I'll leave that to the historians to judge. Last time I checked, this wasn't NAHRG - North American History Research Group.
Hey, it was just a counter argument using examples from history that most people are familiar with. No one is perfect, and absolute power corrupts.
even question Vixie's great contributions such as BIND, I am fighting his little MAPS charity based strictly on the belief that no private party has the right to appoint themselves as communications censors. That role, if it ever comes to it, can only be filled by laws and a government mandate.
Censors?
How has MAPS interfered in ANY way with your mail? Let's say I use MAPS (I don't, FYI... we don't have a need for it). You send mail to me. Based on MY decision to have my server trust MAPS' judgment, my server tells your mail to go screw itself. What did MAPS do other than ADVISE me to reject your mail? If I didn't TRUST MAPS' judgment, then I wouldn't use it.
To some people that write to me directly from this list I can't reply, because they're using MAPS. Some are not even aware that they are blocking NetSide and my replies bounce off their servers. Sorry about that. The problem is, I haven't done anything bad against YOUR service. You would punish me and my users simply because a third party says so. In most cases, you wouldn't even know who else was blacklisted by them, or for what "crime".
That, my friend, is the difference between MAPS and your government censors you seem to WANT. If you have government censors saying "Good ol' Mitch is bad", then it will be the LAW forcing everybody to block you, and you are totally gone. If you have MAPS blacklisting you, then it is ONLY the people who have chosen to TRUST (and pay, nowadays) MAPS that are rejecting your mail. If I were you, I'd prefer the second alternative... at least for your customers' sake.
Vivien
The law would apply equally to everyone. We would have a level playing field, and no private party could claim a position Above the Net ;) Right now, I'm not breaking the law of the land, only Vixie's law. My only "crime" seems to be that I have disobeyed his commandments. And I will continue to do so until his operation is regulated by the law and has a government mandate. --Mitch NetSide
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Mitch Halmu wrote:
Since when is operating an open relay against the law? Please quote the federal law NetSide has broken in having its mail servers configured as they always were since we started in 1995.
Congratulations, you just won an entry into my sendmail '571 list'. And guess what, I dont even need MAPS to do it. The sendmail access hash database works just fine. I suspect many other listmembers who dont run MAPS are manually making entries to block your open relays as well. -Dan -- [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Dan Hollis wrote:
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Mitch Halmu wrote:
Since when is operating an open relay against the law? Please quote the federal law NetSide has broken in having its mail servers configured as they always were since we started in 1995.
Congratulations, you just won an entry into my sendmail '571 list'. And guess what, I dont even need MAPS to do it. The sendmail access hash database works just fine.
I suspect many other listmembers who dont run MAPS are manually making entries to block your open relays as well.
-Dan
Dan, if as an ISP I would block access to anything that offends me personally, or to a service that employs a staff member who vexed my feelings, pretty soon I would have no services to offer to our users. The world is a diverse place, and people have antagonizing opinions at times. I respect anyone's convictions if they are sincere and they don't use brute force to threaten my legitimate business. I suspect that many other list members run, or are employed, by businesses, and make business decisions, rather than personal ones. I also happen to view Internet access as a service similar to those provided by a common carrier. Doubting seriously that any of our users is interested in corresponding with you about that cute bunny girl you display on your web page, there is nothing to mourn about your personal decision. Nevertheless, if it ever happens that one of our users asks why he/she can't send you email, I will forward them this message. I'm sure they will be thrilled to do business with you. --Mitch NetSide
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Mitch Halmu wrote:
Doubting seriously that any of our users is interested in corresponding with you about that cute bunny girl you display on your web page, there is nothing to mourn about your personal decision. Nevertheless, if it ever happens that one of our users asks why he/she can't send you email, I will forward them this message. I'm sure they will be thrilled to do business with you.
Some of us run our own vanity plate domains to separate personal from business. It is unlikely there would be any "business" involved as there is no "business" traffic at this domain, it is my own personal PC and my own domain. Still, its quite amusing to see you threaten to try to damage a business reputation where no business exists to damage the reputation of. And as you've already invoked Godwin's law, this discussion is finished. -Dan -- [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]
On 14 Aug 2001 05:55:56 -0400, Mitch Halmu wrote:
I suspect that many other list members run, or are employed, by businesses, and make business decisions, rather than personal ones. I also happen to view Internet access as a service similar to those provided by a common carrier.
You publically advertised repeatedly that you run an open relay. If it weren't for the RBL (and presumably your link size, as an ISP without an ASN and running a single MX) your open relay would be streaming full of UBE. As it is, you're lucky -- your open relay is "poisoned" by being on many blacklists so spammers probably don't bother with it as much as other, "fresh" open relays. RBL, and formerly ORBS, are/were useful services. ORBS was a bit more contraversial than RBL/MAPS but still far more mature than those who have come to replace it such as ORBZ and ORBL, who have things like mandatory 24 hour delays before they'll do a re-check to confirm a relay as fixed and remove it from their lists. As I'm sure most medium sized ISPs can tell you, you can't be on RBL without significant customer complaints. ORBS listing would also attract a reasonable amount of complaints. RBL and ORBS listings were sufficient to coerce the largest non-multinational ISPs in Australia to change their ways and become more careful about relays. Another way of saying it - relay blocking lists (in general, not just RBL) are the e-mail communities' equivalent to the Usenet Death Penalty, which in turn has caused many a large ISP to review their Usenet spam problems -- possibly not as effectively. You talk of government control. The Internet doesn't exist under one government. Even the ISP I work for spans half a dozen governments ranging from one with extreme censorship, a virtual police state to a country where it costs less than a single note to get someone killed. Consider this. The users vote with their custom to the ISP. The ISPs vote with their configuration and choose the trusted community members who can determine who is right and who is wrong. Paul Vixie is one of those trusted members of the internet community. As to inconvenience, in each country we handle multi-level open relay cases involving our clients daily. At a university I worked at, I developed a class B network scanner to scan for open relays in a class B of address space in under a minute in order to prevent open relays at the university. Initially there were many hundreds; in fact, in March 1998, 255 of our 394 mail servers at that university were open relays. But by August that year, that number had dropped to 13 of the 230 machines which remained as mail servers (almost half the machines which were running e-mail servers at the university were doing it because it was installed by default). Sure, it's a major hassle to clamp down on all open relays -- but open relays are used for the transfer of massive amounts of spam to avoid the blacklisting of the original source. We're even having to code new restrictions for formmail.pl scripts all over the place because spammers are abusing formmail.pl scripts (forged headers to make the submission look legit to the traditional criteria for a valid post) out of desperation now that open relays are becoming increasingly rare. I guess you block SpamCop reports too as an intrusion on your time or your free rights to determine what is abuse and what isn't? -- David Luyer Phone: +61 3 9674 7525 Engineering Projects Manager P A C I F I C Fax: +61 3 9699 8693 Pacific Internet (Australia) I N T E R N E T Mobile: +61 4 1111 2983 http://www.pacific.net.au/ NASDAQ: PCNTF
Since when is operating an open relay against the law? Please quote the federal law NetSide has broken in having its mail servers configured as they always were since we started in 1995.
To my understanding it is _undefined_ at this point and therefore legal. Neither is is _illegal_ to engage the necessary resources to avoid them. The courts, God help us, will sort this out and there will likely be some form of legislative definition too. The root of the issue really goes to the question of whether an ISP is a Common Carrier. I am of the opinion that most would say both Yes and No, and that we are now in the process (here in the US) of trying to hammer this out. I can't really speak for other countries.
Now let me ask you, if it's legal to operate an open relay, then why should we willingly submit to Vixie's law?
MAPS is at best "subscriptive", requiring the implementing party to enable it. (I am of the mind that the so-called evidence of source modifications to Sendmail is weak.) In time our legislators will prescribe governing law and the cycle of enforcement, challenging and refining the law will begin its tedious process. One could use Dun and Bradstreet or other reporting agency as an analogy. There are due-process issues that must be handled carefully, but it is hardly illegal. MAPS is simply a reporting service. I, for one, have grown weary of the villification of Paul Vixie and Dave Rand. Adding such quips only undermines the anti-MAPS arguments and gives this an emotional quality that it does not merit.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Mitch Halmu wrote:
Since when is operating an open relay against the law? Please quote the federal law NetSide has broken in having its mail servers configured as they always were since we started in 1995.
Now let me ask you, if it's legal to operate an open relay, then why should we willingly submit to Vixie's law?
Folks, this twit is like a religious zealot. His agenda is rationalizing open relays and demonizing Vixie et al., and no amount of reasoning is going to get him to see the error of his ways. I should have done this months ago: :0 * ^From:.*mitch@netside.net /dev/null In the interests of operational content and a higher SNR, I ask that you all do the same. IGNORE HIM. Matt - -- Matthew S. Cramer <mscramer@armstrong.com> Office: 717-396-5032 Lead Security Analyst Fax: 717-396-5590 Armstrong Information Technology Services Pager: 717-305-3915 Armstrong World Industries, Inc. Cell: 717-917-7099 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: ascii iQEVAwUBO3ktMgdAU78fakRxAQF2CAf/QiDjI3YGpnE2df0EeANGuxFzAjoyFm1Y KVXBOEemC3N110cB6dKoGcyIlX0K0rK8iNkFOyWAubURyKE/udQX3/ykd0SsA7LO E2LQ0F239bIJgXa+AL8QNgCJA8i34VV5NxTe+wxzDw6IX2CqSU8CzG/aAEjk5U0S conhCeicM3pv3gJNxdM3lNC/PafzGBg0qwoGfOsur7SfI6tSIXI0ZB8+4wcb248v 7V8ugFISAM7Lu8zthiBWY4hPFsXSl1icysZcchvikeeU/3fa5sl9EbPz0yNyPphL +1WzHvMUbOZqo7Ah4BdZQkXkO+LdyynvE6lRxs/E2waN2RvdMap9Cw== =I4iz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Matt Cramer wrote:
Folks, this twit is like a religious zealot. His agenda is rationalizing open relays and demonizing Vixie et al., and no amount of reasoning is going to get him to see the error of his ways.
I should have done this months ago:
:0 * ^From:.*mitch@netside.net /dev/null
In the interests of operational content and a higher SNR, I ask that you all do the same. IGNORE HIM.
Please. I'm beginning to feel like I'm subscribed to cypherpunks again. I'm not sure why any one is treating this argument as though it had two sides, and both of them were rational. Just ignore him. Just ignore them, before they attract more like them. Please. -- No enterprise is more likely to succeed than one concealed from the enemy until it is ripe for execution. Niccolo Machiavelli
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Matt Cramer wrote:
Folks, this twit is like a religious zealot. His agenda is rationalizing open relays and demonizing Vixie et al., and no amount of reasoning is going to get him to see the error of his ways.
The irony meter reads.... 10!!!! -- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Vivien M. wrote:
Example: your local $ILEC has some Yellow Pages, where you are listed as an ISP. Some bad thiefs want to steal a T1 router or a Sparc 5, and figure an ISP would be a good place to get this equipment. They see your listing, break into your facility, and steal your hardware.
Do you sue $ILEC for having set you up for being robbed?
Now, MAPS publishes a listing of people who operate an open relay. You admit running an open relay. Someone else uses that listing to refuse mail from you.
Why is MAPS in that second example more evil than $ILEC in the first one?
Intent Vivien, pure and simple. In the former case of the LEC, there was no _intent_ to inflict damage, as well as no reason to believe that the listing would inflict damage. In the latter case we have a listing whose *stated purpose* is to inflict damage.
Vivien -- Vivien M. vivienm@dyndns.org Assistant System Administrator Dynamic DNS Network Services http://www.dyndns.org/
-- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 11:33:36PM -0500, measl@mfn.org wrote:
The SPAM problem goes up and down to be sure, but you know what? PROCMAIL is your friend. All you need to look for are the basics (ADV, Make Money, etc) and you can instatly filter 90 percent of this trash into the bitbucket.
Please do share your operational experiences with this, with respect to effectiveness, scalability, etc. Sounds like a shocking revelation -- who needs elaborate DNS or eBGP multihop-based blackhole lists, when we can catch 90% of all spam known to man using procmail and a simple subject regex!@?!
At work (not mfn.org), I get several orders of magnitude more mail (usually obnoxious at that) from the "gentle anti-spammers" than the poor "victims" get themselves!
Have you tried unsubscribing yourself from the cypherpunks and spam-l lists? On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 01:24:16AM -0400, Mitch Halmu wrote:
Guilty of what, Vivien? You are accusing me of being a spammer?
While you're not a spammer, you're consciously providing spammers with an invaluable tool: an open SMTP relay to abuse freely.
NetSide's customers were fully informed of our stance published on a web site dedicated to the problem, most agreed, and those that chose to stay and endure the year-long MAPS blockade obviously like their communications uncensored, and truly appreciate being able to transparently use their accounts from elsewhere (i.e., from the office).
Ahhh yes, <http://www.dotcomeon.com/> isn't the least bit biased or factually inaccurate, right? And secure tunneling, SMTP authentication, and IMAP/POP-before-SMTP are hard; let's go shopping.
I dare to be as bold as to imply that their agenda is akin to extracting "protection" money from ISPs. Do you really expect them to blackhole some of their paying "customers"?
Yes. MAPS is (and has been for as long as I can recall) a reputable organization under very close public scrutiny. If they did something this shady, surely someone would raise a stink.
I am fighting his little MAPS charity based strictly on the belief that no private party has the right to appoint themselves as communications censors [...]
So, if you're so opposed to the MAPS-maintained blackholes, what are you using to protect your massive dialup customer base from spam? -adam
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Mitch Halmu wrote:
Vixie's done a lot of things other than MAPS that have done a lot of good; BIND, anyone? I'm sure there are a bunch of others but exposure to such stupidity as your post has caused my mind to go blank.
So Der Fuehrer constructed the German autobahn,
Godwin.
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Mitch Halmu wrote:
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Vivien M. wrote:
The INNOCENTS caught in MAPS were usually affiliated with someone guilty in some way in another; eg would Mitch's customers be considered innocent victims of MAPS, even though their victimness is directly due to their decision to do business with someone who is guilty?
Guilty of what, Vivien? You are accusing me of being a spammer? NetSide's customers were fully informed of our stance published on a web site dedicated to the problem, most agreed, and those that chose to stay and endure the year-long MAPS blockade obviously like their communications uncensored, and truly appreciate being able to transparently use their accounts from elsewhere (i.e., from the office).
Have you ever considered being a televangelist Mitch? If you've got your customers convinced that you're "fighting evil" by not closing your mailservers, you could make the money Jim Bakker bilked from people look like chump change. And Hey! We wouldn't have to see your shit on NANOG constantly!
The "collateral damage" they inflicted is simply unacceptable. The MAPS "agenda" came fully into the limelight with the fees they now ask for the "service". I dare to be as bold as to imply that their agenda is akin to extracting "protection" money from ISPs. Do you really expect them to blackhole some of their paying "customers"?
Mitch, you also dare to be so bold as to suck up oxygen from those of us who actually have something to contribute to the human race. "Protection money?" Give me a break. And Yes. I fully expect them to blackhole a paying SUBSCRIBER if that SUBSCRIBER has a SPAM problem and refuses to address said problem.
So Der Fuehrer constructed the German autobahn, Il Duce made the Italian trains roll on time, etc. Are they good people? While I don't even question Vixie's great contributions such as BIND, I am fighting his little MAPS charity based strictly on the belief that no private party has the right to appoint themselves as communications censors. That role, if it ever comes to it, can only be filled by laws and a government mandate.
Mitch, in case you hadn't noticed, MAPS did not appoint themselfs as ANYTHING. Their listing someone in any one of the database has NO effect at all on anything in and of itself. Those of us who DO use MAPS had to make changes to our configurations. We choose to use the list of sorry low-life pond scum sucking SPAM relaying cry like a baby because they're listed but won't fix the damned problem bastards, such as yourself, that MAPS provides to protect ourselfs and our customers from the same. You want government mandate? How about this. Self government. As the administrator of my domain/AS, I declare them sovern entities and myself the head of state of each. As head of state, I mandate that all said entities shall make use of a proscribed ANTI-SPAM technology. I proscribe the MAPS system as said technology and hereby mandate it's use. Now, you get what you want, I get what I want.
What can I say? We all have our idols and foes. Being objective and impartial about their actions, and having the courage to point at your friend's errors, or dare to disagree with something viewed as "politically correct" in some circles is a different story. It certainly wont't win you any popularity contests...
You think you're objective? BWAHAHAHAHA! And you are VERY popular. I'd venture to say that you're listed in more procmail filters than the whole rest of the subscribership of NANOG combined! Now, please, I BEG YOU -- GO AWAY! --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
I find this all highly amusing.
Fuckem. Vixie is a netnazi who would do us all a favor if he just blew what little brains he has left out of his left ear.
You say this but...
If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings,
You certainly aren't behaving very civilized. My my my, where are your manners? Please take your agenda to an on-topic mailing list. Posting your agenda to NANOG just *bores* the rest of us. I'd rather have some interesting signal for once, instead of all the frivolous and puerile sophistry you and your anti-MAPS clique create. Rachel -- Those who think they know it all are very annoying to those of us who do.
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001 measl@mfn.org wrote:
Fuckem. Vixie is a netnazi who would do us all a favor if he just blew what little brains he has left out of his left ear.
Does the Godwin principle apply on mailing lists too? or just on SnoozeNet? **SJS (wondering if measl@ is an admin at the Minnesota Freenet, but figuring "probably not") -- JustThe.net LLC - Steve "Web Dude" Sobol, CTO - sjsobol@JustThe.net Donate a portion of your monthly ISP bill to your favorite charity or non-profit organization! E-mail me for details.
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001 measl@mfn.org wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Randy Bush wrote:
you could be right. i guess it's time i sent them another donation.
randy
Save it: the people MAPS has harmed neet it more.
MAPS doesn't harm people. People harm people. This is just like the guns argument. Guns don't kill. People kill. MAPS doesn't force themselves on anyone...and having one (or a few) centralized blacklists with informative web sites and clear policies is certainly better than the alternative (every ISP with their own blacklist, nobody having a clue how or the time to get off them all). -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route System Administrator | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
In article <3B757874.C4221651@garlic.com> you write:
It would have been nice if we could all agreed on a DUL database that would be distributed free to anyone to use.
Yes indeed. Unless someone knows of a free source of servers, IP connectivity, and most importantly staff time, I suspect that it would be much cheaper all around to contact MAPS and pay something to use the DUL than for each provider to waste its own staff time coming up with an inferior "free" substitute. I can report from experience that MAPS has been very flexible, and is likely to accept any reasonable offer for access to its lists. -- John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
The staff time is the only one I can't address but a "new DUL" that only did zone transfers (no direct queries) would encourage clones that people could use for testing. That would probably drop the load significantly. "John R. Levine" wrote:
In article <3B757874.C4221651@garlic.com> you write:
It would have been nice if we could all agreed on a DUL database that would be distributed free to anyone to use.
Yes indeed. Unless someone knows of a free source of servers, IP connectivity, and most importantly staff time, I suspect that it would be much cheaper all around to contact MAPS and pay something to use the DUL than for each provider to waste its own staff time coming up with an inferior "free" substitute.
I can report from experience that MAPS has been very flexible, and is likely to accept any reasonable offer for access to its lists.
-- John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 01:19:45PM -0400, Charles Sprickman wrote:
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 13:19:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Charles Sprickman <spork@inch.com> Subject: Re: Affects of the balkanization of mail blacklisting
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Lou Katz wrote:
Complain to the domain who got listed in the first place, wink wink, nudge nudge.
Ummm, the DUL is a list of dialup ports. When it was started, the intent
Right. It is then surprising that an IP address which was listed as a dialup suddenly wasn't.
was not to punish ISPs listed there, but to give mail admins a list of IPs that represent dialup ports, which generally should not be sending mail directly. It is not a mark of shame to be on the DUL. Some of us actually *volunteered* such information to maps.
Which brings me to another point that's been eating at me since maps went commercial... DUL seemed like more of a community effort than RBL or RSS. Many entries were added by people volunteering their own information with the idea that it was for the "common good". I for one, feel shafted that this list to which I contributed, is only available if I choose to pay a sizable amount of money.
A very good point - the DUL was/is different from the other two lists, and perhaps should have been treated differently. As I understood it, some ISPs 'contributed' their configurations as part of ensuring that direct-to-mx spam would be reduced.
As for MAPS working out deals for smaller customers, I've not yet received any replies from their sales kritters, which I will interpret as a "NO".
Likewise. All I got was an autoack and a ticket number. -=[L]=-
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Charles Sprickman wrote:
Which brings me to another point that's been eating at me since maps went commercial... DUL seemed like more of a community effort than RBL or RSS. Many entries were added by people volunteering their own information with the idea that it was for the "common good". I for one, feel shafted that this list to which I contributed, is only available if I choose to pay a sizable amount of money.
MAPS is not the first organization to charge for a 'community' service and won't be the last. Supplying your netblocks to MAPS does not pay the light bill. Or the employees. Or the attorneys.
As for MAPS working out deals for smaller customers, I've not yet received any replies from their sales kritters, which I will interpret as a "NO".
You've called them and not just emailed them, yes?
Which brings me to another point that's been eating at me since maps went commercial... DUL seemed like more of a community effort than RBL or RSS. Many entries were added by people volunteering their own information with the idea that it was for the "common good". I for one, feel shafted
that
this list to which I contributed, is only available if I choose to pay a sizable amount of money.
This feel a bit like CDDB a while back. This is an unfortunate risk that we take when we do things out of a sense of responsibility. There are always people out there willing to repackage others work and sell it as their own. Things like the DUL and CDDB were not started as a 'gimme a bootstrap so I can go and make some cash' but someone decided that exactly that would be a great idea. Ce la vie. Peter
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001 jlewis@lewis.org wrote:
I don't have access to a zone file to check, but I suspect MAPS would have been setting a relatively small expire time on the zones so this sort of thing wouldn't happen without someone at usa.net editing the zone and
The TTL on the zones is 5 minutes. Realisitically most update every 20 minutes to an hour. The DUL is a bit more static than the rest. Subscribers are obligated contractually to maintain current zone files. -- Margie MAPS, LLC
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Margie Arbon wrote:
The TTL on the zones is 5 minutes. Realisitically most update every 20 minutes to an hour. The DUL is a bit more static than the rest.
Subscribers are obligated contractually to maintain current zone files.
Somebody just pointed out to me (and I've verified) that query access to at least the MAPS DUL is open to non-subscribers (still / again ?). I'm hesitant to use it without knowing if this is just a temporary situation, or if there has been some change in policy. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route System Administrator | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
--On Saturday, August 11, 2001 2:56 PM -0400 jlewis@lewis.org wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Margie Arbon wrote:
The TTL on the zones is 5 minutes. Realisitically most update every 20 minutes to an hour. The DUL is a bit more static than the rest.
Subscribers are obligated contractually to maintain current zone files.
Somebody just pointed out to me (and I've verified) that query access to at least the MAPS DUL is open to non-subscribers (still / again ?). I'm hesitant to use it without knowing if this is just a temporary situation, or if there has been some change in policy.
It's temporary. Because of the huge volume of responses (mostly for free access), we have chosen to use a deny table for the largest users while we get all of the allow entries made. This prevents our backlog from cutting off folks that want to subscribe. As soon as we get caught up, we will swap over from a deny table to an allow table. That should be real soon now. -- Margie Arbon MAPS, LLC
On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Roy wrote:
They aren't stolen copies, They are the last secondary transfer of the dul domain before MAPS closed its servers up.
Roy Engehausen
You are implying that giant usa.net is too cheap to pay for the just recently made non-gratis MAPS service? Uh-oh. BTW, interesting data collection going on for a PAID account at usa.net: gender, age, marital status, household income, profession... One could think this sort of data is ideally suited for targeted spamming^H^H^H^H marketing. --Mitch NetSide
participants (34)
-
Adam Rothschild -
Alex Bligh -
Charles Sprickman -
Christopher A. Woodfield -
Dan Hollis -
David Luyer -
Etaoin Shrdlu -
Geoff Zinderdine -
J Bacher -
J.D. Falk -
Jared Mauch -
Jeff Aitken -
jlewis＠lewis.org -
Joel Baker -
John Ferriby -
John Fraizer -
johnl＠iecc.com -
Lou Katz -
Margie -
Margie Arbon
-
Mark Radabaugh - Amplex -
Matt Cramer -
measl＠mfn.org -
miquels＠cistron-office.nl -
Mitch Halmu -
Patrick Greenwell -
Peter Galbavy -
Rachel Warren -
Randy Bush -
Roy -
Steven J. Sobol -
Tim Wilde -
Vivien M. -
Wojtek Zlobicki